Mary the mother of Jesus is an extremely important figure in Roman Catholic theology. According to Catholic Church teaching, Mary is the Mother of God, a perpetual virgin, was conceived without original sin (Immaculate Conception) and remained completely sinless, is the Ark of the New Covenant, was assumed bodily into heaven, and is Queen of Heaven. To what extent is this consistent with what Scripture has to say about Mary?
Mary in the New Testament
When we look at what the Scripture has to say about Mary, we find that Mary is not much of a significant figure in the New Testament. For obvious reasons, she is a significant figure in the Gospel infancy narratives (Matt 1-2; Luke 1-2). But she is not a significant figure in the rest of the Gospels.
Mark and Matthew record an incident where the crowds in Jesus’s hometown, who are offended at Jesus’s pretensions, remark, “Isn’t this Mary’s son and the brother of James, Joseph, Judas, and Simon?” (Mark 6:3; Matt 13:55). A similar episode in a different context is mentioned in the Gospel of John (John 6:42). Three of the Gospels record an incident where Mary, along with Jesus’s “brothers,” is trying to see Jesus, and Jesus responds, “Who is my mother, and who are my brothers? . . . Whoever does the will of my Father in heaven is my brother and sister and mother” (Matt 12: 46-50; Mark 3:31-35; Luke 8:19-21). If Mary really were a uniquely perfectly sinless human being, meant to receive special veneration by Jesus’s disciples, then Jesus’s response here would be very strange. Luke records another incident where a woman cries out, “Blessed is the mother who gave you birth and nursed you,” and Jesus responds, “Blessed rather are those who hear the word of God and obey it” (Luke 11:27-28). This very clearly shows that Jesus did not want people to give special honor to His mother, but on the contrary, to honor those who are obedient to God. If Mary really were, uniquely, someone who was always perfectly obedient to God, then Jesus’s response here would be nonsensical.
In John, Mary is mentioned briefly at the crucifixion (John 19:25-27). She also appears at the wedding at Cana, where Jesus performed His first miracle (John 2:1-12). Some Catholic apologists argue that Jesus referring to her as “woman” in this passage (v. 4) alludes to God’s creation of the “woman” in Genesis, and indicates that Mary is the “new Eve.” However, “woman” is a very common word, making this argument extremely tenuous. Others argue that the fact that Jesus “obeys” Mary in this passage shows what an important figure Mary is as the Queen of Heaven. However, Mary never actually commands Jesus to do anything; she just mentions the problem that they are out of wine, and Jesus responds by choosing to perform a miracle.
These are the only references to Mary in the Gospels. Outside of the Gospels, Mary only appears once, being mentioned in passing in the book of Acts as a member of the early Christian community (Acts 1:14). It does not appear that she was a particularly significant or influential member of the early Church. Mary is never mentioned once in the New Testament epistles. Paul writes that “God sent His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law” (Gal 4:4), but this is just a reference to the fact that God’s Son was born as a human being. Apparently, Paul did not consider it worthwhile to ever say anything about who Jesus’s mother was, which would be extremely strange if the apostles really taught that Mary was the sinless Queen of Heaven.
The New Testament just does not have a lot to say about Mary, and what little it does have to say sometimes directly challenges aspects of Catholic mariology. Nor do the apostolic fathers, the earliest Christian writings after the New Testament, have much to say about Mary. This makes some of the very “high” mariological claims of the Catholic Church suspect. But let us examine each of these mariological claims and assess which, if any, should be accepted by Christians.
Mother of God
Mary is the Mother of God. This is not a uniquely Roman Catholic doctrine. Rather, it is accepted by all orthodox Christian churches, whether Catholic, Protestant, or Eastern Orthodox, having been officially affirmed by the Third Ecumenical Council held at Ephesus in 431 AD.
Some theologically uneducated Protestants are resistant to the idea of calling Mary the Mother of God, feeling that it is linked to problematic aspects of Catholic Mariology. But for Protestants who know their own theology, the theological logic is inescapable. Jesus is God. Mary is the Mother of Jesus. Therefore, Mary is the Mother of God.
Anyone who rejects the idea that Mary is the Mother of God is implicitly denying the central and basic Christian doctrine of the Incarnation. If we say that Mary is only the mother of Jesus’s human nature, and not the Mother of God, then we have implicitly divided the Person of the Incarnate Son of God into two persons: a human Jesus and a Divine Person who has some sort of close relationship with the human Jesus. This is a denial of the Christological teaching of Scripture that “the Word became flesh and made His dwelling among us” (John 1:14). In Jesus, God came to us as a human being. In Jesus, God suffered and died for us on the cross. In Jesus, God lived among us. In Jesus, God was born as one of us. Therefore, we must affirm that Mary is the Mother of God.
Protestants must thus agree with the Catholic Church that Mary is the Mother of God. This is a theologically necessary Christological statement. Mary had the special and unique role in salvation history of being the Mother of God Incarnate, our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Perpetual Virginity
Protestants accept the clear teaching of Scripture that Jesus’s conception was a miraculous, virginal conception and that Mary was a virgin when she gave birth to Jesus. However, the great majority of Protestants reject the Catholic idea that Mary perpetually remained a virgin for the rest of her life. Matthew states that Joseph “did not have sexual relations with her until her son was born” (Matt 1:25). And the New Testament refers numerous times to Jesus’s brothers (Matt 12:46, 13:55, 28:10; Mark 3:31, 6:3; Luke 8:19; John 7:3, 20:17; Acts 1:14). This seems to clearly imply, many argue, that Mary and Joseph must have had sexual relations after Jesus was born.
However, neither of these arguments is airtight. We often use “until” to mean, “up to this point, and then no longer,” but “until” (Greek: eos) can also just mean “up to this point,” without necessarily implying that things will then change. For example, Jesus quotes this psalm and applies it to Himself: “The Lord said to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand until I put your enemies under your feet.”” (Matt 22: 44). This certainly does not mean that, after Jesus’s enemies are defeated, He will stop reigning at the right hand of the Father. And while the word brother (Greek: adelphos) most often refers to a biological brother, it could also refer to some other close family member (or possibly Jesus’s half brothers from a previous marriage of Joseph).
Consider this episode during Jesus’s crucifixion: “When Jesus saw His mother and the disciple whom He loved standing nearby, He said to His mother, “Woman, here is your son.” Then He said to the disciple, “Here is your mother.” From that time, this disciple took her to his own home” (John 19:26-17). Apparently, Joseph had at some point died, leaving Mary as a widow who needed a man to take care of her. Jesus asks one of His disciples to take on this responsibility. But if Jesus had actual biological brothers, then obviously they would have taken on this responsibility of caring for their mother, which would make Jesus’s request incomprehensible. Thus, there is good reason to think that the references to Jesus’s “brothers” in the New Testament do not refer to his actual biological brothers.
Furthermore, there are good biblical reasons for affirming the perpetual virginity of Mary. When the angel tells Mary that she will conceive and give birth to a son, her immediate response is, “How can this be, since I do not know a man?” (Luke 1:34). Since Mary is just about to get married, and the angel tells her that she will conceive and give birth to a son (future tense), it seems pretty obvious how this will be, making Mary’s response extremely puzzling. Unless, that is, Mary had already made a commitment to perpetual virginity, and planned on maintaining that commitment even after getting married to Joseph. This is the only explanation for Mary’s response that makes sense.
Most Protestants just gloss over this biblical evidence for Mary’s perpetual virginity. Perhaps this is because of the widespread and deeply unbiblical denigration of celibacy that exists in the modern Protestant church? Whatever the reason, this is a Mariological issue on which the Catholic Church’s position, rather than the typical Protestant position, appears to be correct.